Once information is on the internet it's almost impossible to take it back. The Duke lacrosse team information was already in the web caches of some internet search engines, ready to be retrieved and put back on the internet. Which is what immediately happened. So what did Duke accomplish by taking down the lacrosse team information? That action just made it appear that the entire team was possibly guilty of doing something bad. It added to the perception of guilt that was building in Durham, stoked by the local news organs and the public security apparatus.Those pictures from the Duke website were the same ones used for that infamous "wanted poster" that started circulating all over Duke and Durham. Crimestoppers had the web info and pictures. The police investigators also had the website information and were using it to put together their initial photo lineups for the alleged victim....Getting even more specific, should Duke have just removed some of the player's individual information that was listed: height, weight, and photos? If they did, does that not also taint the team and imply concealment? Again, that information is already available and part of the public domain. If Duke keeps the information online they can at least utilize it to draw interested internet user's attention to their official position regarding the matter.Should Duke have left all the lacrosse team web pages and information online and simply amended them with some official statement regarding the presumption of the "team's" innocence? Legal and public relations experts are probably better prepared to discuss all of this and crisis management strategies involving the internet. One interesting side question regarding the team is whether the Duke men's lacrosse roster for 2006-07, if it is posted [The 2006-07 roster is now posted; however, without links to individual photos. In fact, the reposted 2005-06 roster has no links to individual photos, either--P.Z.], should symbolically include the names of Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty? Seligmann and Finnerty, who would have been juniors on the 2006-7 team, are techically on a leave of absence from the university. ...

(All emphases mine--P.Z.)

Though the Johnsville News blog doesn't address the alteration of the reposted 2005-06 roster, Duke's reposting of the 2005-06 roster without the names of Evans, Finnerty, and Seligmann is historical revisionism (albeit, on a small scale) and implies that Duke considers their names tainted, regardless of the outcome of their upcoming trial.

It won’t be long before someone at that blog laces on the RINO gloves, I reckon. Thielen’s non-democratic selection by Lingle and the Hawaii Republican Party leaders could become a GOP mirror image of the Case-Akaka “fight for the soul of the Party” event… Oh, fun. More interesting to me: while his mother is a Republican who supports alternative energy, David is a Democrat who supports nuclear power (first posted here). He doesn't totally reject alternative energy, but says it's insufficient to power the country. He writes:

I think one of the top priorities of this country should be finding 2 or 3 standard safe state of the art designs for nuclear power plants and put us on a crash program to build them out until we eliminate the need for oil in this country.

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

If Coffee should win but be unable to campaign, the local GOP will have to select someone to take his place. The logical choice would be the next highest vote-getter in the primary, but there is no obligation to do that. The other five folks in the race are Mark Beatty, Chas. Collins, Jay Friedheim, Edward Pirkowski and Steve Tataii.The Republicans may decide the remaining five lack the name-recognition and firepower to go head-to-head with the winner of the Democratic primary contest between U.S. Sen. Dan Akaka and U.S. Rep. Ed Case.Enter: Who?Speculation right now rests on Honolulu Councilman Charles Djou, who is nominally nonpartisan today but is well-identified with the Republican Party through his years in the Legislature.Djou, who faces no opposition for re-election, has nonetheless been running expensive television ads reminding voters of who he is and admonishing them to remember his name.And it would be a no-danger adventure for him to run for Senate, since he would not have to resign his seat on the council.But at this point, the drama seems more focused on keeping Republican voters "at home" than it does on developing a complicated and some might even say devious plot to get a hand-picked candidate into the Senate race.It would make sense that Lingle would like to see Republicans stay within their own party. That decreases the number of people who might "cross over" and end up voting for the more moderate Case against the liberal Akaka.Why should Lingle care? She might want to run for the U.S. Senate herself one day, when her gubernatorial days are over.A relatively youthful and relatively moderate Case, in the early years of his Senate career, would make a tougher opponent than an aging and far more liberal Akaka in the twilight of his senatorial days.

A Long Shot

Of course, if Coffee wins the primary and recovers enough to campaign in the general, then wins that, it might throw a wrench in Lingle's plan. But he's still older and probably in poorer health than Case, so he wouldn't be a big opponent should Lingle decide to run for Senate after her governorship is over (assuming she wins this election, which is very likely, but never say never.)

September 14 update: This comment to yesterday's Poinography post is very insightful:

On your final point: I think it was you that suggested the Lingle wants to be able to use the Senate race as an opportunity to raise the name recognition of one of her GOP “rising stars"? That certainly sounds like a reasonable secondary motive. But I think Lingle does want Ed Case to fail in his bid for the Senate and that is her primary motive in calling upon the GOP voters to NOT crossover.Sam Slom and his network ARE encouraging crossover voting. I also think it coincides with the feeling of most Hawaii Republicans that Ed is really, at heart, one of them. Certainly most “kamaaina Republicans” feel that way. For them, voting for Case is not a matter of voting for a “lesser evil.” He’s their boy! Even the “Hawaii Reporter” Republicans are fond of Ed and have been promoting him for years, except for the estrangement when they were supporting Gabbard over Case for Congress.Some hard right GOPers may think Ed is too “liberal” for them if they are motivated by social issues like opposition to gay rights or abortion and other women’s rights issues. For them, Ed might still be a “lesser evil” vote than Akaka. [Mark Beatty is socially conservative, and will be the "values voters'" choice--P.Z.]SO I expect a significant GOP crossover. Enough to possibly swing the election to Case.Also, I agree that the GOP would LOVE to have an opportunity to pick their candidate after they know whether Akaka or Case wins the Democratic nomination. If Case were to win, I think the best choice for them would be one of their key Hawaiian operatives. Lingle-them have been VERY smart in how they have worked the Hawaiian community in an effort to rebuild the old Haole-Hawaiian alliance that held sway for decades. A lot of Hawaiians would vote for a Micah Kane or a Sam Aiona over an Ed Case. Not enough to win, but it would help build loyalty among Hawaiian voters.That logic disappears if Akaka wins the nomination, so I woud expect they would save Aiona or Kane and use the opportunity to build the profile of some other candidate.I do agree that Lingle is trying to “game the system” and to assume onto herself powers that should remain with the voters. Even granting the fact that Coffee’s withdrawal was unforeseen and perhaps the Republicans should be given another chance to put forward a strong candidate, good faith with the voters would require that Lingle anounce in advance who they have in mind as Coffee’s replacement.I repeat what I have said elsewhere. For all this talk about the “Democratic machine,” the Democratic Party is MUSH more internally democratic and transparent than the GOP under Lingle. Our State Convention was open to observers and broadcast for public review on Olelo. I called to see if I could observe the GOP convention and there were few sessions open and even then, I would have to have been a guest of a GOP officeholder or candidate. Our platform, resolutions and Rules are posted for public review on our website. Can someone provide me a link to such documents on the GOP website–I can’t find them.Comment by Bart — 9/13/2006 @ 11:08 am

Monday, September 11, 2006

Borreca either failed to ask for a denial (or even comment) from Lingle on the possibility that she would herself fill that vacancy on the ballot if Coffee were to win the GOP special election, or (hopefully) he asked and she dodged the question.

Doug follows with a lengthy quotation from Borreca's column, then chastises him:

“More to the story,” indeed. This story should have asked Governor Lingle and Republican Party Chair Sam Aiona for an explanation of why this replacement should not be named in advance.

Doug continues:

I suspect that one reason why the Hawaii Republicans won’t name their replacement in advance of the primary is because they have more than one person in mind. i.e. I suspect that if Case and Coffee win in the primary, then the GOP would name a different replacement for Coffee than they would if Akaka and Coffee were to win.

Read the whole piece and the attached comments. There's speculation Lingle might appoint herself if Coffee, recuperating from a heart attack, wins the primary. Don't quote me on that just yet, though. (September 12 update: However, there's the chance that a victorious Coffee, whose name is still on the ballot because he didn't withdraw in time, could serve in office, throwing off Lingle's plans.)

Lingle may be gushing (over) Coffee, but the GOP Hawaii blog has recently pulled its July post deriding Ed Case as "still a liberal to the core" and endorsing Coffee:

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Still a Liberal! Don't be fooled, Ed Case is still a liberal to the core.

Many Republicans are considering pulling a democrat ticket in the Primary election, just so they can cast a vote to support Ed Case over Daniel Akaka in the race for the coveted state Senate seat. Ed Case makes a strong case for why voters should elect him over Dan Akaka. He points to the need to do succession planning, making room for the newer and younger perspectives, etc. That all sounds great, but let us not forget that Ed Case is a bleeding heart liberal to the core and when push comes to shove, he will vote with the likes of Neil Abercrombie, John Murtha, Dennis Kucinich and Nancy Pelosi (a gaggle of liberals kooks). Don't believe it? Case's voting record speaks for itself, he voted "NAY" (No for your people in Puna) on HR 2389 Pledge Protection Act that protects the Pledge of Allegiance from federal judges who might try to stop schoolchildren and others from reciting it becasue of the phrase "under God." These liberals will gladly stand behind same sex marriage, abortion, pornography and other devient acts but will attack God, Country, marriage between a man and woman only and other normal, acceptable activities in America. God help us and save us from Liberals of all stripes! Let it be stated loud and clear....Ed Case is a LIBERAL. Calling all Republicans in the County of Hawaii: During the primary election, vote for Capt. Gerry Coffee for Senate! 1:17 PM Permalink

In its September 7 issue, Hawaii Free Press has a front-page, above-the-fold headline: Our Endorsements: Ed Case for Senate. No mention at all of Jerry Coffee. The endorsement article ends with "Ed Case's stand strong [sic] against corruption and his openness to new directions is a breath of fresh air. His election to Senate would continue the badly needed transformation of Hawai'i's political scene begun with the 2002 election oif Linda Lingle as Governor. Please cast your ballot for Ed Case, September 23."

Thursday, September 07, 2006

OLD: A Stinky Sock PuppetThe "brilliant" Lee Siegel wasn't smart enough to get away with being a sock puppet. He is now suspended from The New Republic. Things like this once interested me much more.NEW (as of 19 September): I see that Aunty Hattie mentioned me, referring to my "O Canada" post, and this one, on Lee Siegel. I checked out his New Republic blog. Replying to one's own blog under an alias--the reason for his dismissal--isn't so bad. My apologies for coming to a hasty conclusion.

Here is a brief account of the Hogue-Kawananakoa race. Not as famous as Akaka-Case, Hogue- Kawananakoa (a.k.a. the "Popular Pauper" and the Prince) is bubbling under the surface. Kawananakoa is campaigning hard and Hogue usually seems laid back, but will make an issue of Kawananakoa's wealth: The Honolulu Advertiser notes, "Their differences were also highlighted in a public battle, when Kawananakoa called on Hogue to discontinue his Midweek sports column for the duration of the campaign, which Hogue countered by saying he had to earn a living because he didn't have access to a vast fortune, as Campbell Estate heir Kawananakoa does..."

However, this article in HawaiiReporter.com can do the fighting for Hogue:

Unfortunately for Kawananakoa, his money may be his downfall, not his salvation. Why the backlash?

The modern trend in American politics is populism. Thus, Kawananakoa, with his cool, patrician demeanor, is depicted as a mandarin, with this article shouting for him to come out of his ivory tower. Admittedly, Hogue has a sweaty, Ratzenbergian charm (September 9 update: Gary Hooser is another Hawaii candidate who looks like Cliff Clavin, even without the mustache) while Kawananakoa is a genuine aristocrat, yet one who points out in the aforementioned Honolulu Advertiser article that he "started out at Dole pineapple washing down machines." In short, Kawananakoa is not quite the ivory-tower man(darin) the press has portrayed him to be.

Friday, September 01, 2006

September 3 update: The debate (7:30-8:30 P.M., Hawaii Time) was opposite the MTV Music Video Awards. I didn't watch the Awards, which I thought was dull. Others thought so, too. (Another problem with the VMAs in recent years has been its airing in late August rather than after Labor Day, which rushes things somewhat.)

I thought (and others concurred) the debate was dull, too, mainly because of all the restrictions the host (Hawaii's AARP chapter) placed beforehand on the proceedings.

The exact format for a leaders debate varies, but normally the debate will begin with each leader making a short opening statement. Then a panel of well-known journalists will ask sets of prepared questions, which are to be answered either by all of the leaders or by one specific leader. After the leader(s) answer each question, the other leader(s) may get a chance to make a brief response, after which there may be some time allocated for an often heated "free for all" debate. The moderator will usually attempt to exercise some control through all of this, and then stop the debate after time has elapsed so the next question can be asked. [Emphasis mine] After the panelists finish asking questions, each leader will make his or her closing remarks and the debate will end.Case and Akaka addressing one another. It never happened. Case was more than willing, Akaka was not.